go_forward

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations and no explanatory text, the description carries the full burden and discloses nothing. It doesn't say whether this moves browser history forward, whether it fails silently when no forward history exists, or what state the page ends in.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single word is not concise, it is under-specified. There is no front-loaded statement of what the tool does or returns, so brevity here costs the agent the information it needs.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A navigation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameters depends entirely on the description for meaning, and the description provides none. An agent cannot tell whether this is a browser action, when it is valid, or what happens on failure.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema. Baseline 4 applies for a parameterless tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Forward" merely restates the tool name in noun form. It implies browser-history traversal when read against the sibling `go_back`, but it never states a verb or resource, so an agent must infer the purpose from the name alone rather than from the description.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance about when to use this over `go_back`, `navigate`, or `reload`. No conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives are mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.